Obama Healthcare upheld in court today
 

Today, it has been announced that the Supreme Court has upheld Obama's healthcare plan where it basically makes everyone in the U.S. get health insurance.

It's basic goal is so that everyone gets health care and that you're not in so much debt if you ever end up in an ER.


Under this plan, the good things are that:

1. You can get health insurance even with a pre-existing condition. That means that if you contracted HIV when you didn't have health insurance, when this law is enforced, you will be able to get health insurance coverage because presently, health insurance companies won't cover diseases or conditions you have or contracted before you applied for health insurance.

2. Health insurance will be affordable. Essentially, this plan is going to make health insurance affordable so that it's possible to get health insurance. Even if you make a small amount of money, you can still afford health insurance with government help.

3. If you are under 26; you can be put in your parents's health benefits through their job. So even when you're old enough to rent a car at 25, you will still be covered by your parents's health insurance through the company they work at (if the company has health insurance).


Here are a couple bad things though about this bill.

1. If you don't get health insurance, you will be issued a penalty fee on your taxes that you must pay. If you don't pay this penalty fee, you will be sent to prison for tax evasion. So this bill actually FORCES you to get health insurance.

2. The money seems to be going towards private companies instead of health care. So I guess anyone working in the higher ups or executive positions of a health insurance company like Cigna or Blue Cross will be rolling in the dough


As long as the health insurance will be affordable, then I'm fine with it. If you don't have a job now; I suggest getting one right now with health benefits. Otherwise, save up whatever money you can to be able to buy health insurance.

You do have two years since this goes in effect in 2014. Again, this will go into effect in 2014.

It feels kinda anti-climatic that this story is just now hitting the Drome forums. Twitter, Facebook, and every single major news site went nuts with this story all day.

Also, CNN & FoxNews once again embarrassed themselves.

Most folks' jobs offer benefits... but not freely. I just dropped mine. It's about $100 a paycheck, and if I'm not getting super sick then I'd just as soon save $2,600.00 a year.

I haven't had health insurance since I dropped off of my parents' because I could never afford to sign up for it. That's what pisses me off most about this bill, because if I can't afford to buy insurance how am I supposed to afford to pay a "tax" for not having it? The people who write this crap assume too much about the people they are targeting to punish.

"Luckily," I will be signing up for insurance next month when open enrollment comes around. I would be perfectly content going without, and fitting it into my budget will still be a stretch, but I figure I've pushed my luck for long enough going without and if I don't do it now I wouldn't have the opportunity again until 2014. But I still think this is a horrible law to have.

Gotta love the new "sin tax" that essentially forces people who wouldn't really require coverage to pick it up.

at some point you'll need it or someone in your family will... then you will be thankful for it...

Oh, I have health coverage NOW through my work, primarily for my wife, and I am happy to have it, but for years I didn't have it because I didn't need it. Now those relatively healthy people, especially the very young, will have to have insurance, even if they never use it. Not really sure which is better in the long run.

think of it like car insurance... you just accept that you have to have it...it is illegal to go without it... that's that...and now those when "relatively healthy" young folks, find themselves one day with cancer, epilepsy or even paralyzed from an accident (just three examples of VERY expense health problems that can happen to anyone, at any age) they will not have to scramble to figure out how they are going to pay for treatment and they wont be able to be denied coverage for "pre-existing conditions"

Yes, but car insurance only covers those kind of major accidents, and mostly cover when you cause damage to others. Does car insurance cover oil changes or tune ups? No. Car maintenance is your responsibility.

The key difference to this analogy is that I can choose not to drive. If I don't want to pay the health "tax," does that mean I'm supposed to kill myself?

It means you'll end up in prison, so the government can get some use out of you.

You realize how ridiculous this statement is, right?

USA confuses me at times

yeah, and that is sort of the same as with health insurance... because you are supposed to be taking care of your body- but there are things out there you cannot control- so when those things do happen people will not have to scramble to figure out how they are going to pay for the treatment that they need.

Looks like I'll be saying goodbye to ever seeing another income tax check. Either that or I'll wind up in jail for the crime of having other, more important bills to pay. F*cking excellent.

And I'm the type of persopn - allegedly - this bill is supposed to help. I get sick a LOT in winter; the full-blown red and yellow discharge/coughing up blood/ sometimes it's pneumonia respiratory infection kind of sick, I'm good for about a solid 5 or 6 weeks out of commission total every single year. Thing is, I figured out a LONG time ago that, when I go to the doctor, get pills, and pay for all of it, I get better in about a week. Then I get another infection from someone else at work or in public about 3 weeks later, and I'm out again. They don't call it "disabled", thank you very much, just "too sick to work and sick enough not to get fired over it." BUT, if I DON'T go to the doctor, DON'T get any meds, and just sweat it out for a week or so... the same thing happens, MINUS the $200 I spent for an office visit and prescriptions. So essentially, I pay $200 for a pat on the head, some placebos, and a note to my boss.

So I just don't go to the doctor anymore. I figure if I'm missing 3-5 days of work as it is I really can't waste money going to the doctor (how ass-backwards does that sound, though? But it's true!); especially if I'm gonna get better in a week and then sick again in another 3 or 4, no matter what I do. I've been told surgery "should help maybe probably possibly"; the only upside I see to this bill is that IF I could afford insurance - which I can't - I might then in turn be able to finally get that surgery and see if it works. But aside from that I make less than $30 grand a year, having to either buy insurance OR pay a penalty is f*cking unreasonable and just promises I'm gonna stay destitute for a long time to come unless Vince McMahon calls, which he won't.

I'm with Rose, these people don't think, they just do whatever sounds best on paper, which is usually not at all applicable to real life. Plus, on the rare occasion I do go to a doctor, I already wait ungodly long; I can only imagine how it's gonna be once I gotta wait in line behind everyone who wants to be treated for everything from a headache to a hangnail.

I'm sure there's good stuff in there but for me, realistically, this is just making bad into worse. Leave me the f*ck alone... "force" me to buy insurance. BS. Here's what they need to do to get me onboard: You pay into the system, and you don't use your coverage at all throughout the year, or only go like once or twice for regular checkups and have no incidents or issues, you get 1/4 of it back tacked onto your tax refund. The cheapest job-provided plans hover around $5200 a year; that's a lot of money considering if you're on the cheapest plan you likely don't have much money to begin with, so how much do you think folks would LOVE getting about $1000 or $1200 of that back if they've barely been to a doctor all year, or only went once for a checkup? Seems fair to me.

It shouldn't be "just like car insurance", if anything car insurance should be just like what I said, too. The only reason you "have to have it" is because it's in the interests of the ruling class to keep people poor any way they can, and forcing everyone to pay for things only some people need is a very effective way to do that, but that doesn't make it right.

I like what Chris Rock once said in a skit: "Insurance should be called 'In Case Sh*t'. You pay 'In Case' Sh*t happens. If sh*t don't happen, shouldn't I get some of that money BACK?" Any sane person says yes. Never happen, though.

Health insurance seems so bizzare, why isn't just a regular part of the tax instead of having it as it's own thing?

I just pay taxes, and my part together with everyone else that have a job, that money goes to things like school, roads, health care and so forth. Maybe its just me being a foreign in a "commie" country that don't get it.

I'll just say the same thing, I say to everyone: For us Europeans, who take health care for granted, this debate is confusing and most of the time hilarious.

Yes it is but that's going to be the law now. You don't like it, then vote for Romney for President since he says he'll repeal it.

This bill has actually split this nation in two on what they prefer for this bill. Some LOVE it, others hate it and want it repealed.

Would you all want this law enforced in 2014 or no?

Has this law made you support Obama more or have you switched to Romney? Do you support Romney more now since he'll repeal it if he's President or have you switched to Obama because you need health insurance and this bill makes it affordable and possible to have, no matter what.


For my answer: If the health insurance company allows me to see a doctor that can actually speak English, then I'll support it.

This is just ridiculous. We're supposed to be a free and independent country, but this bill is negating that fact by forcing people to get health insurance. I don't care what the Supreme Court ruled on, it's unconstitutional to force people to do something like that.

As for the candidates, I hate both of them and don't trust either one. So, you won't see me in a voting booth as I hate politicians and think they're just crooks.

I was so seriously contemplating Ron Paul...and I may still vote for the guy. For a politician he seems some how honest, ya know. I may not agree with him on every thing, but he's stood for what he believes for years, and hasn't waffled and changed positions when it's convenient, like both Romney and Obama.

Funny you should say that. A British girl on DeviantART has told us that she doesn't like Britain's National Heath Service. Also, David Sedaris, an American living in France, has said that when he goes to the doctor, he usually doesn't get treatment and is told that his problem will clear up on its own. So maybe public health care isn't what it's cracked up to be.

Also, the Supreme Court only said that the individual mandate is allowed under the US Constitution. It doesn't mean that Obamacare cannot be repealed, which it may well be.

Oh, there are occasionally politicians who are good, though they are rare. And I live in Cook County, Illinois, which has had plenty of bad politicians-which is why I never believed the hype about how Obama was going to be so fantastic. Now a lot of people realize what I knew all along.

Ron Paul, a true Pittsburgh treasure :)

Awesome. Now maybe somebody's mom won't die from cancer in the span of 3 months due to not having health insurance.

Keep on with your political rambling because it's soooooo important that you get to keep your precious precious money to fritter away on ninja turtle bullsh*t.

That doesn't change much. My mother-in-law was eaten alive by cancer in the same 3 month span, and she did have insurance. All it did was make it more comfortable for her to die.

And you seriously believe that Obamacare has brought health insurance protection to the people who hadn't had it before? Guess again. It was a leftist who has told me that this wasn't the case.

i think you mean to say, it wouldnt have changed much in my mother-in-law's situation... to say "that doesnt change much" as pertaining to all cancer/treatments is pure ignorance...

True, but in cases where you are that eaten up by cancer, there's little hope, insurance or no.

but there are extreme cases with almost any illness or condition (even the flu!) certainly you wouldnt say "oh you have cancer? well no need to get that healthcare (that you can now afford and you can't be denied) because it will simply kill you and make no difference, i can see the future and that is how your cells will mutate and spread, i know this because it happened to someone completely different than you"

Oh really? One person told you one thing on something? A person I don't know and have no knowledge on besides you saying that they were a leftist? Oh! Well that changes everything!

Also, save it Jester. Don't care about your bullsh*t either.

So for people who get health insurance through their place of employment...this whole thing means nothing. Got it.

I certainly heard no evidence otherwise. If you can find evidence that now more people have health insurance coverage thanks to Obama, let's see it. I've yet to hear any Obama supporters saying that the health care system has gotten better.

And BTW, they already have a statewide system in the state of Massachussetts where you have to buy health insurance, and if you cannot afford it, you can buy a special state policy. Trouble is, one Massachussetts resident I've talked to has told me that though he couldn't afford regular insurance, he wasn't allowed to buy the state policy. Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

Yes, you are right. Two people have said that it's no good so it must be true.

If I mentioned five would that have made a difference to you? In other words, I did provide evidence of what I said being true.

[citation needed]

Also, like other Europeans said: Utterly confusing.

In the US, we hear two sides about healthcare in other countries. On the one side, people say we are way behind on the issue. The opposing side that doesn't want any healthcare reform tells horror stories about Canada and Europe, about how people have to wait forever for treatment, etc.

The fear mongering side is so vocal that I sometimes wonder if there is remotely any truth to what they say. After all, why the heck would someone be opposed to healthcare being more available to people in need, unless they really like the "screw you, got mine" attitude?

Sometimes people do have to wait a long time. Months in worst case-scenarios.

This obviously doesn't apply to critical **** like cancer or whatever. It's more like "Oh, your hips are a little worn out and they hurt? Wait two months and we'll fix that with surgery.

But if you are in a hurry (at least here in Sweden, don't know about the rest of Europe) and you have the money, you can always choose to go to a private hospital instead. No biggie.

There is an annual "fee" for medicine, if you have some chronic ****. The government will pay most of it, and the patient will NEVER have to pay more than 2600 SEK (375 USD at the moment) a year.

Necessary plastic surgery (like on a severely burnt person) has the same price tag. Unnecessary plastic surgery is paid for in full by the patient.

Dental care isn't included, but more and more citizens and politicians think that it should be. It probably will be if we get a left-leaning government after the election in two years.

So that's basically Swedish health care. Doesn't sound so scary now, does it? ;)

Yes, that's basically the health system here too. It's not like the national system is the ONLY system that is available. If you have the insurance, or the money, or the referrals, then you can have treatment on the private system, just like how all US hospitals operate. The national system is there for routine or minor procedures, or a safety net to help treat people who cannot go private. And that's the part that the fearmongers in the US who point out the negative aspects of the systems in Europe tend to ignore.

Except is there the money for it? Wait until the economy goes bad and the government has to make cutbacks, and you think the health care system won't be affected? As an Illinois resident, I know that it will. Look at the public hospitals closing and the medical people not getting paid by Medicaid. So we Americans aren't so irrational after all.